The Ethics of Genetic Screening

A Jewish perspective on issues related to screening for Tay-Sachs disease.

Tay-Sachs disease is a particularly tragic, inherited illness. A baby is born healthy, with no indications of an abnormality. Sadly, at approximately six months of age, the formerly cheerful baby gradually loses its previously gained milestones and undergoes physical and mental deterioration. The baby loses muscle tone and stops smiling, crawling, and turning over, losing its ability to grasp or reach out. Eventually, the child becomes blind, paralyzed, and unaware of the surrounding world. Death almost always occurs by age five.

The underlying defect in Tay-Sachs disease is a lack of an enzyme called hexosaminidase A, an enzyme that is necessary for breaking down specific fatty substances (ganglioside GM2) in brain and nerve cells. These fatty substances build up and gradually destroy brain and nerve cells, until the entire central nervous system stops working. While there are rare cases of later onset Tay-Sachs disease1 (which may be less severe), the infantile type of Tay-Sachs is by far the most common.

Is there a Torah obligation to seek genetic screening for Tay-Sachs? If genetic screening is permitted or required, when should people be tested? To whom shall we reveal the results? Should we inform employers, insurers, and relatives? What are the ramifications of testing positive for an abnormal gene? Are there different ramifications of testing positive before versus after marriage?

In this article, we will use the gene for Tay-Sachs, found in high prevalence in the Ashkenazi Jewish population, as a representative example of the issues arising when testing for a recessively inherited disease.

A LESSON IN GENETICS

A gene vs. a disease
In order to understand the Jewish approach to genetic screening, background information is required. We must first make a clear distinction between a gene and a disease. One may carry a gene for a disease without manifesting any ill effects. One's genotype, or genetic makeup, is merely a description of a person's genes. If one expresses the trait coded for by the lethal gene, we say that his phenotype, or physical nature, is positive for the disease.

Modes of inheritance
Diseases may be inherited in several ways, the two simplest mechanisms being autosomal recessive and autosomal dominant. The cells of human beings carry two copies of the gene for each trait, however the copies may not be identical. One requires two genes for a recessive trait to be manifested, while one requires only one gene for a dominant trait to be manifested. For instance, one may carry a single gene for blue eyes and another for brown eyes, yet one's eye color will be brown, since brown eye color is a dominant trait. One would require two blue eye genes to actually have blue eyes.

Why do kids get Tay-Sachs and adults get breast cancer?

Offspring could develop the disease only if both parents are carriers and both passed it on to their child -- a one in four chance per pregnancy.

Recessively inherited diseases, such as Tay-Sachs, tend to affect children.2 In such a recessively inherited disease, those with two defective genes would die as children, while people carrying one copy of the gene would be phenotypically normal, but risk passing the gene on to their offspring. Practically speaking, this means that for any lethal genetic disease that manifests exclusively before reproductive age, there must be many unaffected adults carrying the gene for the deadly disease in question. The only way (barring mutation) that the offspring of a carrier could develop the disease would be if their spouse also carried the defective gene and both passed it on to their child, a one in four chance per pregnancy.

This is both a blessing and a curse. Since carriers are healthy, there is no simple way to remove the gene from the gene pool. 3 We would have to bar all carriers from having children, a prospect which is both unethical and cruel. On the other hand, we could easily prevent the birth of babies with recessively inherited diseases (such as Tay-Sachs and cystic fibrosis) by preventing carriers from marrying.4

For any dominantly inherited trait or disease, only one copy of the gene for that trait is required, such as in the case of brown eyes mentioned above. Any child who inherits even one copy of the defective gene for a disease such as Huntington Disease (a lethal neurological disease) will almost certainly develop the disease, although the age of onset may be between two years and over 80 years. All lethal dominantly inherited diseases must have adult onsets or there would be no one to pass on the disease to the next generation. These diseases would also be virtually impossible to eradicate, since mutations are fairly common and we would have to forbid people who are currently healthy (but are likely to develop the disease) or already manifesting the disease, to marry. Some forms of breast and ovarian cancer demonstrate dominant inheritance.

Why screening for recessively inherited diseases is less traumatic
The Jewish community has had a lot of experience dealing with screening for recessively inherited diseases through Tay-Sachs testing programs for over 30 years. Because one is only testing for a gene, but not for a disease itself, there is a definite psychological benefit. There is no direct threat to the health of the person being tested. The carrier remains healthy following the discovery of the carrier state -- only potential offspring are affected. Additionally, knowledge of the carrier state empowers one to act to prevent the birth of children with a tragic disease. Therefore, the person being tested can retain their self-image of normal health.

The traditional Jewish community has been very receptive to Tay-Sachs testing. Jews have used the knowledge gained from testing to significantly decrease the incidence of Tay-Sachs births, with segments of the Orthodox community virtually eradicating Tay-Sachs births by an ingenious method of preventing carriers from marrying (which I will describe later in this article). Widespread testing has also been strongly encouraged by all segments of the Jewish community. Nevertheless, many issues arise even in testing for a recessively transmitted disease.

Is there a moral obligation to screen and if so, when?
While the Torah obligates us to guard our health,5 it does not necessarily follow that testing ourselves for recessive genetic traits (that do not directly affect our health) is included in the mitzvah. Nevertheless, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein favored Tay-Sachs testing and considered the possibility that testing might be a moral obligation.6 He states that while one may usually ignore a small risk that society finds acceptable (See: Taking a Risk),7 not being tested for Tay-Sachs is like closing one's eyes to an obvious danger. He also points out the severe emotional repercussions of not testing if a Tay-Sachs child is born.

Yet, Rabbi Feinstein feared that testing teenagers could hurt the self-image of those testing positive and lead to discrimination against them when seeking a spouse. He recognized that despite assurances from the medical community that carrying the Tay-Sachs trait presents no health issues for the individual or his offspring (so long as both spouses are not carriers), many people will shun marrying into a family with a genetic defect. Therefore, Rabbi Feinstein insisted on safeguards to protect confidentiality, advising testing of youngsters on an individual basis (and not mass screening), and only when he/she is prepared to start dating.

Dor Yeshorim
Rabbi Feinstein's approach is the approach of Dor Yeshorim, an organization that functions in the traditional Jewish community where formal introductions precede first dates. Dor Yeshorim carries the conclusions of Rabbi Feinstein to their logical conclusion. Being a carrier for Tay-Sachs does not impact on the health of the individual being tested and only affects potential offspring. Therefore, so long as marriage between carriers is prevented, there is no reason for anyone to be informed of the test results, including the prospective spouse and even the person himself!

Dor Yeshorim tests people for a variety of recessively inherited diseases,8 most notably Tay-Sachs, only informing matchmakers whether a prospective match presents a problem of genetic incompatibility.9 Neither of the young people is told of their carrier status, but any potentially disastrous matches are averted. This anonymity is crucial in preventing Tay-Sachs status from causing emotional pain before marriage. It avoids initial emotional attachment between carriers by preventing their meeting, and prevents catastrophe after marriage (if two carriers marry). Dor Yeshorim has prevented many genetically incompatible matches before the couples ever met!10

On the other hand, Rabbi J. David Bleich,11 law professor at Yeshiva University, feels that testing should be done on a mass scale when children are young. He argues that appropriate education of the Jewish community could lead to the removal of the stigma attached to having a bad gene. He feels that proper instruction is the cure for the ignorance that leads to discrimination towards people carrying recessive genes such as Tay-Sachs and while he appreciates the goals of Dor Yesharim, he objects that:

. . .in refusing to divulge the results of genetic tests to either the young men and women affected or to their parents, a negative stereotype is dramatically reinforced. The hocus-pocus of assigning numbers and later announcing that the prospective marriage of the bearers of matched numbers will either be propitious or will not be propitious imbues the process with a Byzantine-like quality.

Testing after marriage
Obviously, testing for lethal recessive traits (such as Tay-Sachs) before marriage allows the greatest latitude in decision-making. One may choose to go the Dor Yeshorim route or to discuss one's carrier state with any potential mate. In any case, the full range of options remains open.

The options for two Tay-Sachs carriers who are already married are much more limited because of the Torah12 command to be fruitful and multiply. Since the Torah commands us to attempt to have children, Jewish law does not permit deliberately sterile marriage.13 While adoption is certainly meritorious, it still does not fulfill the Biblical obligation of procreation.

Artificial insemination by a non-carrier donor raises issues of adultery, paternity, and inheritance, while it does not fulfill the mitzvah of procreation. From the woman's side, egg donation and surrogacy raise similar questions, but additionally, raises the problems of establishing maternity. Is the genetic mother or the birth mother considered the baby's true mother? Naturally, the question of surrogacy also leads to concerns regarding the ethics of buying and selling eggs and use of a woman as an incubator for hire.

Is amniocentesis and abortion of affected fetuses a viable option? From a Jewish perspective, abortion is generally reserved only for cases involving danger to the mother (See: Abortion in Jewish Law). While this surely includes the mother's emotional health, such as severe post-partum depression and suicidal ideations, it usually does not include the health of the fetus.14 In fact, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein forbids amniocentesis for the purpose of fetal diagnosis of Tay-Sachs, ruling that the mere performing of the procedure transgresses the Biblical commandment of not placing a stumbling block before the blind.15 He argues that by offering the test, the physician is party to likely decision to abort if the fetus is positive for Tay-Sachs disease.

A viable option for married couples
The most promising option for such couples is pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. The parents agree to conceive their offspring via in vitro fertilization. The three day pre-embryo, made up of approximately eight cells, has one cell removed to be tested for a specific genetic defect before implantation. Only a zygote that is not homozygous (having two defective genes) for Tay-Sachs would be implanted. Rabbi Yosef Shalom Eliyashuv, possibly the most influential posek [authority in Jewish law] in Israel today, has permitted pre-implantation diagnosis and implantation of healthy zygotes to prevent cases of Fragile-X and even in a case of a woman with neurofibromatosis who only had skin lesions.16 Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, which is already accepted by some rabbinic authorities, is likely to be acceptable to most Jewish legal experts when used to prevent serious diseases in offspring.

Who should be told?
While in the Dor Yesharim model, an individual does not know whether they carry the gene for Tay-Sachs, most people are tested by labs that do release the results to the person whose blood was tested. Who else should receive this information? This issue is less problematic in a recessively inherited disease than for a dominantly inherited disease. The information that one is a Tay-Sachs or cystic fibrosis carrier should not affect insurance premiums or insurability.

Since siblings share one half of their genes, if someone finds that they are a Tay-Sachs carrier, there is a 50% chance that their sibling is also a carrier. Sharing such information with even more distantly related relatives provides useful information with practical benefits. The knowledge that they may carry the gene may spur them to be tested and to avoid marrying another carrier if they are positive. Short of any irrational stigma attached to possessing the carrier state for a recessive gene, there should be no more reason to avoid sharing the information with others than to hide poor eyesight or any other trait that we generally do not conceal from others. In fact, while poor eyesight actual affects the person, the carrier state has no health repercussions!

Conclusion
Genetic screening for recessive traits is a great boon to the Jewish community (and the rest of the world). Whether done confidentially or publicly, the information gained provides the opportunity to make wise and informed decisions about the future. There are no health ramifications for the person being tested, but by utilizing such means, we can look forward to a future filled with more hope and less disease.

1 These are often referred to as juvenile, chronic and adult-onset forms of hex A deficiency. Affected individuals have low levels of the hex A enzyme that is missing entirely in the classical, infantile form of the disease. This may help explain why symptoms begin later in life and are generally milder than in the classical, infantile Tay-Sachs disease. - http://gunsmoke.ecn.purdue.edu/~kpasquet/project/tays.html (see also http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/taysachs/taysachs.htm)
2 Deadly diseases (such as Tay Sachs) that affect children must necessarily be recessively inherited (unless they are the result of random mutation), since otherwise anyone carrying a single gene for the disease would die before they could have children and the disease would also disappear. Such diseases continue to exist because healthy people carrying a single copy of the defective gene have a one in four risk of passing the disease on to offspring if they marry another carrier.
On the other hand, autosomal dominant diseases (such as some breast cancers) must occur almost exclusively in adults, since the gene for such diseases are carried only in people who will manifest the disease. Were the disease to strike children exclusively, there would be no one of childbearing age to pass on the defective gene or the disease. Exceptions to this rule occur in diseases that have incomplete penetrance, occur due to random mutation, or that are not always fatal.
3 There is very real significance in the variable ways that diseases can be inherited. Unfortunately, there is no ethical way to ever remove a recessive gene such as Tay Sachs or cystic fibrosis from the gene pool. This is because most copies of the defective gene are in normal, healthy people that are only carriers of the gene. For instance it is estimated that one in 30 people of Ashkenazi Jewish descent and one in 30 people of French-Canadian/Cajun descent carries the gene for Tay Sachs. This means that there are hundreds of thousands of carriers, all of whom are healthy people.
4 While limiting choices in marriage partners may appear to be impractical, even if a known Tay Sachs carrier wanted to randomly date within the Ashkenazi Jewish population, he/she would only be precluded from marrying 3% of prospective mates. If the same person would also date non-Ashkenazi Jews, the limitation would be even smaller than one in 30! Most people voluntarily eliminate a much higher percentage of prospective mates based on other less serious criteria such as appearance, height, weight, philosophy, etc. 5 Take heed to yourself and guard your lives carefully (Deut. 4:9) and Guard your lives carefully (Deut. 4:15)
6 Igros Moshe, Even Ha'ezer 4:10
7 Shomer p'saim Hashem Psalms 116:6
8 Dor Yesharim also tests for Canavan, Niemann Pick disease, Gaucher disease, Bloom syndrome, Fanconi anemia, Cystic fibrosis, Familial Dysautonomia, Mucolipidosis IV, and Glycogen Storage Disease type 1a.
9 An individual can also call with their Dor Yesharim number and inquire whether there is any barrier to dating someone else who has been tested by Dor Yesharim if they know the number of the prospective mate.
10 In fact, there has not been a single Tay Sachs baby born in the American or Israeli Haredi communities in several years!
11 Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Thought, Vol. 34, No. 1: spring 2000
12 Genesis 1:28
13 Tractate Berachos 10A
14 Only one prominent posek allows abortion for Tay Sachs, but his a lone dissenting opinion; see Tzitz Eliezer vol. 9, #51:3; Tzitz Eliezer, vol. 13 #102.
15 Igros Moshe, Choshen Mishpat II; 69:2. There is also a small risk of complications from amniocentesis, including the approximately 1/200 chance of miscarriage.
16 Personal correspondence with Dr. Avraham Steinberg.

Related Articles:

About the Author

Dr. Daniel Eisenberg is with the Department of Radiology at the Albert Einstein Medical Center in Philadelphia, PA and an Assistant Professor of Diagnostic Imaging at Thomas Jefferson University School of Medicine. He has taught a Jewish medical ethics class for the past 15 years. Dr. Eisenberg writes extensively on topics of Judaism and medicine and lectures internationally on topics in Jewish medical ethics to groups of all backgrounds. Obtain more information on scheduling a lecture or learning more about Jewish medical ethics by visiting Dr. Eisenberg at www.daneisenberg.com

Visitor Comments: 8

The article is well written but there is a misconception which I feel makes many people in the non-Chassidic comunity avoid using Dor Yeshorim.

If a man and woman who have been tested by Dor Yeshorim want to check for compatibility, it specifically CANNOT be done by the Matchmaker or any other party.

The call to Dor Yeshorim MUST be made from the home phone number given by one of the couple when he/she was tested. Since it includes some passwords/codes of both the man and the women, it can also not be initiated by one without the other's knowledge.

(7)
Lesley Hubbard,
May 8, 2005 12:00 AM

Genetic Screening

I think this article is an excellent one and the subject is very relevant. Please keep them coming as I think that we need to know more about genetic screening/inherited diseases and problems in this day and age.

(6)
Mrs. BRCA2+,
April 19, 2005 12:00 AM

To Whom It May Concern,

Please note that after reading Dr. Daniel Eisenberg's article pertaining to the BRCA gene and genetic testing, I felt compelled to write to him. I was concerned when he wrote that Aish was hesitant to publish his article on genetic testing and cancer, as the BRCA gene is a dominant gene.

To the best of my knowledge, doctors who recommend genetic testing for any given patient do not do so indiscriminately. Medical Ethics aside, HMOs and PPOs have only so much money to go around.

Prior to making such referrals, MDs take a thorough family history. In doing so, they look for first degree relatives who have undergone treatment for cancer.

I am writing this letter based on personal experience. My paternal aunt and uncle died as a direct consequence of genetic cancer. Two other members of my family
underwent treatment for cancer and survived. In addition, some of us are carriers for the BRCA2 gene.

The BRCA2 gene is linked with ovarian cancer as well as breast cancer. While the odds of developing ovarian cancer during the course of a carrier's lifetime are 25%, and the odds that a carrier will develop breast cancer are 85%, ovarian cancer is a silent killer.

Because I needed to ask a shaila prior to getting tested and undergoing prophylactic surgery, I am aware of the fact that the Psach Halacha that is given is going to vary from person to person, situation to situation, and Posek to Posek. I am most grateful
to have found out that I am a carrier, as this information may have saved my life.

I need to add that there are studies out that link the BRCA1 gene with Bloom Syndrome, and the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes with Fanconi Anemia. Dor Yesharim tests for both of the aforementioned conditions.

It should be noted that my degree is not a medical degree, nor am I in any of the sciences or public health.

One of the biggest issues that I have with the psach that Rabbi Moshe Dovid Tendler has rendered is that it is no shonde for the neighbors if someone is a carrier for a genetic condition. It is far better to have our leaders work to help us shed this mentality and save lives than it is to act like storks and hide our collective heads in the sand.

I am aware of the fact that New York State is not as open minded about genetic testing as is the state in which I reside. Those who have family histories such as mine should not be compelled to suffer the consequences that this Psach and this policy have forced on people. It would seem far more apropos for a Rabbi of Rabbi Moshe Tendler's stature to tell the residents of New York State to contact their representatives and let them know that reform is needed and it is a matter of civil rights.

In sum, I will paraphrase what Hillel said: "If the members of Klal Yisroel don't look out for themselves, who will, and if not now, when."

Best wishes for a Chag Kasher V'Sameach. Please understand that in a sense, I am
Bicultural. I went to an integrated high school during the Civil Rights Era, and I came from a secular background. This is part and parcel of why our failure to speak out and be proactive has me baffled.

Mrs. BRCA2+

(5)
Anonymous,
January 13, 2005 12:00 AM

Excellent article

This article is an articulate presentation of an important issue. Just as an aside which may prevent some heartache to others, I would like to relate an experience I had this year. We have several healthy children, thank G-d, and at a routine prenatal visit (at a new ob/gyn group) the doctor inquired about whether I had "Ashkenazic" genetic testing performed. I responded affirmatively for Tay Sachs, but having been tested with Dor Yeshorim many years ago, the other 7 or 8 genetic tests had not been included. The doctor recommended that I test for the other diseases and I went ahead innocently enough. Sure enough, I was a carrier for another disease and for logistic reasons we could not have my husband tested for a while thereafter. In the interim we suffered much anguish (already pregnant first of all and second of all noticing suspicious symptoms suddenly in one of our healthy children). Along the way we discovered that at least some (if not all) Rabbonim do not recommend genetic screening once the couple is already married. This article advocates pre-marital screening and I agree wholeheartedly. I'm just mentioning the point that after marriage, the issue should be discussed with a Rabbi if relevant.

(4)
Anonymous,
January 11, 2005 12:00 AM

in response to the statement below...

which was written against Dor Yeshorim's policy of absolute confidentiality, even from the couple being tested- one must understand the cultural differences that necessitate this rule. Although you may not mind knowing what your genes are, there are those who may feel put down about themselves because they are a "carrier" even if there is no practical manifestation of the trait whatsoever. Personally, I come from a family that would not put any sort of a stigma on a genetic predisposition. My spouse's family is cuturally different in mentality and although they would never treat a person differently because of a genetic predisposition, it would still be in the back of their heads. It is for this reason that Dor Yeshorim has a "noone knows" policy. One should not be stigmatized, especially in the critical area of shidduchim for something that is not a practical factor. As for those who say that the kids of a Dor Yeshorim couple will need to be tested because they don't know the parents' results, I know of a family that have many kids and instead of getting them all tested, the parents had open genetic testing so that they wouldnt have to pay for all of the kids if the parents came out in the clear. As for stigmatisms, a- maybe it didnt bother them at all and b-they were already married, no shidduchim problems (and I would hope that they wouldn't go around telling people the test results). Just thought I'd give the other side of the story...

(3)
Anonymous,
January 9, 2005 12:00 AM

While I commend you..

for speaking about genetic diseases, especially about FX, one must be very careful about suggesting that a particular way of doing things isnt accepted by all (#14 Only one prominent posek allows abortion for Tay Sachs, but his a lone dissenting opinion; see Tzitz Eliezer vol. 9, #51:3; Tzitz Eliezer, vol. 13 #102), when in fact big poskim, not just any old Rabbi, are using this commentators opinion in basing their decision in giving a heter. This heter being the only chance for a couple to have a healthy child!

Let me also inform you that IVF/PGD does not always work. In the case of FX, to begin with you have to have certain markers to identify the gene and even then, it isnt always successful, believe me, I've gone through it twice!

As well, IVF with PGD is VERY expensive (one is lucky if a insurance co. will reimburse even part of it!), time and emotionally consuming!

So for those people who may be relying on this heter, lets not diminish its value.

(2)
Anonymous,
January 9, 2005 12:00 AM

This is a really informative and well written article. Tay sachs appears to be the most well known and documented of all the genetic diseases.
In Toronto, Canada there are Genetic testing clinics put together by hospitals and Jewish organisations. This is a great service and for testing and education.
It is important to educate families about all the genetic disorders affecting the Jewish population that include; Canavan disease, Familial Dysautonomia, Bloom Syndrome, Fanconi anemia, Gaucher disease, Glycogen storage disease type 1a, and Niemann-Pick disease type A.
Pretty scary and overwhelming, but I would rather be informed before bringing a child into the world.

(1)
T K,
January 9, 2005 12:00 AM

Dor yeshorim's approach causes more problems.

I don't like Dor Yeshorim's approach becauce if two parents DO know that they are not carriers, none of their children will have to be tested. Keeping results confidential is an obvious precaution, but from the tested person themself? This is not right.

I just got married and have an important question: Can we eat rice on Passover? My wife grew up eating it, and I did not. Is this just a matter of family tradition?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

The Torah instructs a Jew not to eat (or even possess) chametz all seven days of Passover (Exodus 13:3). "Chametz" is defined as any of the five grains (wheat, spelt, barley, oats, and rye) that came into contact with water for more than 18 minutes. Chametz is a serious Torah prohibition, and for that reason we take extra protective measures on Passover to prevent any mistakes.

Hence the category of food called "kitniyot" (sometimes referred to generically as "legumes"). This includes rice, corn, soy beans, string beans, peas, lentils, peanuts, mustard, sesame seeds and poppy seeds. Even though kitniyot cannot technically become chametz, Ashkenazi Jews do not eat them on Passover. Why?

Products of kitniyot often appear like chametz products. For example, it can be hard to distinguish between rice flour (kitniyot) and wheat flour (chametz). Also, chametz grains may become inadvertently mixed together with kitniyot. Therefore, to prevent confusion, all kitniyot were prohibited.

In Jewish law, there is one important distinction between chametz and kitniyot. During Passover, it is forbidden to even have chametz in one's possession (hence the custom of "selling chametz"). Whereas it is permitted to own kitniyot during Passover and even to use it - not for eating - but for things like baby powder which contains cornstarch. Similarly, someone who is sick is allowed to take medicine containing kitniyot.

What about derivatives of kitniyot - e.g. corn oil, peanut oil, etc? This is a difference of opinion. Many will use kitniyot-based oils on Passover, while others are strict and only use olive or walnut oil.

Finally, there is one product called "quinoa" (pronounced "ken-wah" or "kin-o-ah") that is permitted on Passover even for Ashkenazim. Although it resembles a grain, it is technically a grass, and was never included in the prohibition against kitniyot. It is prepared like rice and has a very high protein content. (It's excellent in "cholent" stew!) In the United States and elsewhere, mainstream kosher supervision agencies certify it "Kosher for Passover" -- look for the label.

Interestingly, the Sefardi Jewish community does not have a prohibition against kitniyot. This creates the strange situation, for example, where one family could be eating rice on Passover - when their neighbors will not. So am I going to guess here that you are Ashkenazi and your wife is Sefardi. Am I right?

Yahrtzeit of Rabbi Moses ben Nachman (1194-1270), known as Nachmanides, and by the acronym of his name, Ramban. Born in Spain, he was a physician by trade, but was best-known for authoring brilliant commentaries on the Bible, Talmud, and philosophy. In 1263, King James of Spain authorized a disputation (religious debate) between Nachmanides and a Jewish convert to Christianity, Pablo Christiani. Nachmanides reluctantly agreed to take part, only after being assured by the king that he would have full freedom of expression. Nachmanides won the debate, which earned the king's respect and a prize of 300 gold coins. But this incensed the Church: Nachmanides was charged with blasphemy and he was forced to flee Spain. So at age 72, Nachmanides moved to Jerusalem. He was struck by the desolation in the Holy City -- there were so few Jews that he could not even find a minyan to pray. Nachmanides immediately set about rebuilding the Jewish community. The Ramban Synagogue stands today in Jerusalem's Old City, a living testimony to his efforts.

It's easy to be intimidated by mean people. See through their mask. Underneath is an insecure and unhappy person. They are alienated from others because they are alienated from themselves.

Have compassion for them. Not pity, not condemning, not fear, but compassion. Feel for their suffering. Identify with their core humanity. You might be able to influence them for the good. You might not. Either way your compassion frees you from their destructiveness. And if you would like to help them change, compassion gives you a chance to succeed.

It is the nature of a person to be influenced by his fellows and comrades (Rambam, Hil. De'os 6:1).

We can never escape the influence of our environment. Our life-style impacts upon us and, as if by osmosis, penetrates our skin and becomes part of us.

Our environment today is thoroughly computerized. Computer intelligence is no longer a science-fiction fantasy, but an everyday occurrence. Some computers can even carry out complete interviews. The computer asks questions, receives answers, interprets these answers, and uses its newly acquired information to ask new questions.

Still, while computers may be able to think, they cannot feel. The uniqueness of human beings is therefore no longer in their intellect, but in their emotions.

We must be extremely careful not to allow ourselves to become human computers that are devoid of feelings. Our culture is in danger of losing this essential aspect of humanity, remaining only with intellect. Because we communicate so much with unfeeling computers, we are in danger of becoming disconnected from our own feelings and oblivious to the feelings of others.

As we check in at our jobs, and the computer on our desk greets us with, "Good morning, Mr. Smith. Today is Wednesday, and here is the agenda for today," let us remember that this machine may indeed be brilliant, but it cannot laugh or cry. It cannot be happy if we succeed, or sad if we fail.

Today I shall...

try to remain a human being in every way - by keeping in touch with my own feelings and being sensitive to the feelings of others.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...